I’ve been testing RoboForex account types and noticed the “cheapest” option shifts a lot once I factor in how often I trade. On weeks where I do 20–50 trades a day, ECN looks better on paper, but slippage and commissions change the math. On slower weeks with swing holds, Standard sometimes ends up cheaper after rebates and swaps.
I’m calculating true cost per lot as spread + commission − rebate + average slippage + swaps. Over a full month, what actually came out cheaper for your style? Please share your trade frequency, typical lot size, pairs, and your rough net cost per lot if you’ve tracked it.
ECN won for scalps Standard better for swings.
To match account to frequency, build a one month cost log. For each pair record average spread, commission, rebate credit, slippage on entry and exit, and swaps. Convert money values to pips so you can compare cleanly. Example on EURUSD ECN: 0.3 spread plus 7 dollars commission is about 0.7 pip. Subtract a 2.1 dollar rebate to get near 0.5 pip before slippage. Then add your average slippage, say 0.2 pip. For swing trades Standard can win because commission is lower and some swaps help. Run a 30 to 50 trade sample per style before deciding.
I track it week by week and it helps a lot.
Log spread, commission, rebate credit, and slippage, then average the numbers. After a month the cheaper account becomes obvious.
I trade 10 to 20 times daily. ECN plus cashback beat Standard by around half a pip per lot on EURUSD after one month of logs.
Did two full months of side by side testing.
Month one was heavy scalping on majors. ECN ended about 0.6 pip per lot cheaper after cashback and typical slippage.
Month two was light trading with multi day holds. Standard edged out ECN by roughly 0.2 pip per lot because commission dropped and swaps were fine on my pairs.
If you change pace, consider keeping both accounts live and rotate. I switch based on planned frequency for the week.